Moskowitz
B+
99% — 74.5 of 75 opinions sound, per qwen3.8-27b; in the top 26% of 80 graded judges
On the assumption that the model is right — qwen3.8-27b reads the court's own disposition right 70% of the time, graded on a curve: A is the top fifth of the judges graded under this model, F the bottom fifth; ++ / + / − / −− within the band. How the grade is made.
1cases reviewed on appeal
76opinions authored
103panels sat on (not as author)
—1 merits decisions: a rate is shown from 10
Outcomes on appeal
Areas
By year: 1997 1 ·
Analysis
No analyses yet. When they exist, this shows counts of the model's findings across this judge's reviewed cases — with the court's own dispositions beside them, and only from 10 cases.
Cases
- Varsam v. Laboratory Corp. of America
- Antoninetti v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.
- Willis v. Buffalo Pumps Inc.
- McAdam v. State National Insurance
- Ulloa-Navarro v. United States
- United States v. Morales-Landa
- McAdam v. State National Insurance
- United States v. Olmos-Gonzales
- Dremak v. Iovate Health Sciences Group, Inc.
- Repara v. Beers
- Ministry of Defense & Support for the Armed Forces v. Cubic Defense Systems, Inc.
- United States v. Vega-Ortiz
- Edward Bylsma v. Burger King Corporation
- In re Grand Jury Proceedings
- Hayes v. Dovey
- Valdez v. Kismet Acquisition, LLC
- United States v. Michelle Wing
- United States v. Goodbear
- Lon Martin v. Kenneth Quinn
- Atanda v. Eric Holder, Jr.
- Edward Bylsma v. Burger King Corporation
- United States v. Brittany Smith
- In Re Hydroxycut Marketing & Sales Practices Litigation
- Dremak v. Iovate Health Sciences Group, Inc.
- Lindley Contours, LLC v. Aabb Fitness Holdings, Inc.